No Rome-SSPX Accord? From CFN LETTER FROM FR. COUTURE ASIA DISTRICT SSPX - Crusaders of the Immaculate Heart2024-03-28T14:02:38Zhttps://op54rosary.ning.com/forum/topics/no-rome-sspx-accord-from-cfn-letter-from-fr-couture-asia-district?feed=yes&xn_auth=noBohol, Philippines
by parisho…tag:op54rosary.ning.com,2012-09-23:5691517:Comment:857402012-09-23T11:26:45.264ZDawn Mariehttps://op54rosary.ning.com/profile/DawnMarie
<p><strong>Bohol, Philippines</strong></p>
<p><strong>by parishoner Nauta</strong></p>
<p><strong>September 23 2012</strong><br></br> <br></br> I arrived at Tagbilaran Chapel to attend mass. The chapel main door was locked. I thought there's no mass, but a faithful said that there will be mass and that Fr. Chazal is inside. <br></br> <br></br> Some faithful and I enter through a side door beside the sanctuary. And I saw Fr. Chazal with a red sash instead of black as many SSPX priest used to wear. He asked me…</p>
<p><strong>Bohol, Philippines</strong></p>
<p><strong>by parishoner Nauta</strong></p>
<p><strong>September 23 2012</strong><br/> <br/> I arrived at Tagbilaran Chapel to attend mass. The chapel main door was locked. I thought there's no mass, but a faithful said that there will be mass and that Fr. Chazal is inside. <br/> <br/> Some faithful and I enter through a side door beside the sanctuary. And I saw Fr. Chazal with a red sash instead of black as many SSPX priest used to wear. He asked me what time is the schedule for mass and he led the rosary. <br/> <br/> A moment later I went out and there I learned that Fr. Chazal is to be locked out, the reason why the chapel is closed. They are forbidden to say mass, though the reason of his coming, according to him is to explain to the faithful his side. Then a priest (Fr. Ghela) that is send to say mass has arrived and told the faithful gathering outside the chapel that Fr. Chazal and Fr. Joe Pfeiffer are now expelled already. <br/> <br/> When the door was opened and the faithful has seated, Fr. Chazal asked Fr. Ghela in front of us to give him time to talk but the reply is "Please get out, Father." And then Fr. Chazal countered that it was his money used to build that church built under by fr. Joe Pfeiffer. He said that he will not get out but is going to sit at the last pew. He was given five minutes. And true to his words he remained at the last pew throughout the mass. <br/> <br/> During the sermon, a letter from Fr. Couture is read that says that Fr. Chazal is now expelled. But the name of Fr. Joe Pfeiffer was not mentioned in the letter. <br/> <br/> After the mass Fr. Chazal said during our conversation that "now they thrown me out."</p> Yes Rebecca it would be a 'hu…tag:op54rosary.ning.com,2012-09-14:5691517:Comment:845282012-09-14T17:13:41.536ZMary Ellenhttps://op54rosary.ning.com/profile/MaryEllenCarr
<p>Yes Rebecca it would be a 'huge gesture of humility and charity'. It would be absolutely wonderful if that occurred.</p>
<p>I will continue to pray, as we all will, to our most Blessed Mother!</p>
<p>Yes Rebecca it would be a 'huge gesture of humility and charity'. It would be absolutely wonderful if that occurred.</p>
<p>I will continue to pray, as we all will, to our most Blessed Mother!</p> Yes, such a frenzy of rumors,…tag:op54rosary.ning.com,2012-09-14:5691517:Comment:843722012-09-14T16:56:52.124ZBirgittahttps://op54rosary.ning.com/profile/RebeccaAlexis
<p>Yes, such a frenzy of rumors, half-truths and secrets. Trying to decipher and read between the lines to see which is the right way to go....which choice is the correct one for salvation's sake? Watching people seem to change sides every time a new article is released or leaked. It has been pretty ugly. I hope it is officially over at last. I think it will be a long time before B. Fellay or his successor will be tempted by Rome again, because this will be a stinging reminder for many years…</p>
<p>Yes, such a frenzy of rumors, half-truths and secrets. Trying to decipher and read between the lines to see which is the right way to go....which choice is the correct one for salvation's sake? Watching people seem to change sides every time a new article is released or leaked. It has been pretty ugly. I hope it is officially over at last. I think it will be a long time before B. Fellay or his successor will be tempted by Rome again, because this will be a stinging reminder for many years to come. It would be a huge gesture of humility and charity if the priests who were punished for sounding the alarm were approached with genuine love by their superiors and offered reinstatement.</p> Commenting on the following:…tag:op54rosary.ning.com,2012-09-13:5691517:Comment:842562012-09-13T16:59:10.903ZMary Ellenhttps://op54rosary.ning.com/profile/MaryEllenCarr
<p>Commenting on the following:</p>
<p></p>
<p><em>"Some however thought and prophesised that Bishop Fellay was going to surrender the SSPX to the modernist authorities, to the conciliar errors and to the new mass. They were certain this was going to happen in June. But it didn’t. They then announced it was</em><br></br><em>going to happen in July. It didn’t ...... <span>Those who are doing this today are leading souls by fear and away from Catholic…</span></em></p>
<p>Commenting on the following:</p>
<p></p>
<p><em>"Some however thought and prophesised that Bishop Fellay was going to surrender the SSPX to the modernist authorities, to the conciliar errors and to the new mass. They were certain this was going to happen in June. But it didn’t. They then announced it was</em><br/><em>going to happen in July. It didn’t ...... <span>Those who are doing this today are leading souls by fear and away from Catholic Tradition."</span></em></p>
<p><em><span> </span></em></p>
<p>My comment: If only Bishop Fellay would have communicated clearly while all this was happening. He kept many in the dark. In addition consider Father Rostand's ambiguous statements throughout this ordeal. . </p>
<p>In reference to Father's comments above, surely he must understand WHY some priests and faithful were concerned and acted they way they did.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Hopefully the wound will heal.</p> Declaration of Dom Tomás de A…tag:op54rosary.ning.com,2012-09-11:5691517:Comment:839712012-09-11T21:07:06.440ZCopacabanahttps://op54rosary.ning.com/profile/MariaElenaOrihuela
<div class="post hentry"><h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://www.spessantotomas.blogspot.com.br/2012/09/declaration-of-dom-tomas-de-aquino.html">Declaration of Dom Tomás de Aquino, reply to Fr. Bouchacourt…</a></h3>
<div class="post-header"><div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
</div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"></div>
</div>
<div class="post hentry"><h3 class="post-title entry-title"><a href="http://www.spessantotomas.blogspot.com.br/2012/09/declaration-of-dom-tomas-de-aquino.html">Declaration of Dom Tomás de Aquino, reply to Fr. Bouchacourt</a></h3>
<div class="post-header"><div class="post-header-line-1"></div>
</div>
<div class="post-body entry-content"><div><a href="http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10791">http://z10.invisionfree.com/Ignis_Ardens/index.php?showtopic=10791</a></div>
<div>In view of the Communiqué of Rev Fr Bouchacourt the Monastery of the Holy Cross declares to have called H.E. Msgr Richard Williamson to Brazil because he is considered a worthy defender of the Catholic Faith, able to confirm in the Faith not only the monks of the Holy Cross, but also the relgious communities and the faithful, who see with great apprehension the nefarious policy of practical agreements with Rome before Rome converts of its liberal and modernist errors.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Why had the Capuchins, the Dominicans and even the Benedictines of Bellaigue their candidates excluded or threatened to be excluded from the ordinations, if not because of their opposition against an agreement? And this when Rome already didn't want the agreement anymore, at least not at this moment.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>To keep the true reasons of what we are experiencing secret, is missing the truth. Why was Msgr Williamson asked to shut down his “Eleison Comments” if not because of the doctrine therein exposed? Why did Msgr Tissier de Mallerais have to interrupt his preaching in the USA, if not because he was against the policy of agreement? Why was Fr. Koller threatened with punishment, if not because he preached against this same policy? Why were the Rev Frs Cardozo, Chazal, Pfeiffer and others either punished or expulsed, if not because of their opposition against this same policy?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Msgr de Galarreta had called for caution some months ago: “For the good of the Society ... and of the Tradition, it's necessary to rapidly close Pandora's box, to avoid discredit and demolition of authority, to avoid contestation, discord, divisions, which may be irreversible.”</div>
<div> </div>
<div>And Msgr de Galarreta asked, which would be the required conditions for a totally acceptable proposal, that is, for a victory which only can be doctrinal, because in this whole battle all rests upon the Faith. He himself answered by quoting Msgr Lefebvre: <i>[the Archbishop explaining how he would ask them whether they are in full communion with Quanta Cura etc., many times cited on Ignis Ardens (Fideliter, n°66, November-December 1988, pp. 12-13)]</i></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Conclusion. “Pandora's box” has not been properly closed, the line traced by Msgr Lefebvre has not been followed.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>But probably the Rev Fr Bouchacourt will say that, on the contrary, everything was put right at the General Chapter. All is fine in perfect order. Sadly this is not the truth. The General Chapter maintained the objective of the agreement on a different basis than that exposed by H.E. Msgr Marcel Lefebvre. Read the Eleison Comments of Msgr Williamson about the six conditions and you will see how the resolutions of the General Chapter are not sufficient and are different from those of Msgr Lefebvre.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Others will say: what do you have to do with this? I do have, because the Faith is a common good of the Church and I belong to the Church and besides I have responsibility for the monks of Holy Cross and for the faithful who express their confidence towards us.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>But they still will say: the obedience transfers the resposibilities to the superiors, and to be obedient is never wrong. Unluckily things are not so simple. This was the way how the majority of the Bishops accepted the Second Vatican Council.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>But they still will say: You contribute to the division of Tradition. I respond that the union should be built around the truth, that is around the Catholic Faith. And the words and attitudes of Msgr Fellay sadly are not those of a disciple of Msgr Lefebvre, who defended the truth without concessions. Why silence Msgr Williamson and Msgr Tissier de Mallerais? Read the letter of the three Bishops to Msgr Fellay and his assistants and there you will find the reason of the battle of Tradition and the reason of our attitude.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>[Gustavo] Corção [a Brazilian writer, hero of Vat. II resistance] incessantly repeated that a wrong notion of charity and union caused grave damage in the Catholic resistence. When truth and charity are separated, charity ceases to be charity. Many, even of his friends, accused him of a lack of charity because of his articles. But the first charity consists in telling the truth. And Corção was right, as the facts have proved. Msgr Lefebvre was charged with the same accusation.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Concerning union, Corção humorously said that experience had taught him against the popular saying “union makes strength” that union frequently makes weakness. And why? Because union without truth, union made with concessions, union which sacrifices the Faith, is weakness which “makes strong people weak”. And this is what happened with the Second Vatican Council, isn't it? To preserve the good of the union with Paul VI many bishops ended signing inacceptable documents. The union didn't make strength but the opposite.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Now, today in Tradition they want us to join, whatever it may cost, with those who believe, that the errors of the Council are not so grave, that 95% of the Councel are acceptable, that the religious liberty of Dignitatis Humanae is very, very limited, that we should not make super-heresies of the errors of the Council. But that is not true. The Council was the biggest desaster of the history of the Church since it was founded, as Msgr Lefevbre says in his book "From Liberalism to Apostasy". If we should build on this basis or we should unite on this basis, I prefer to abstain from that, and prefer to work for the integral restauration of the Catholic Faith as Msgr Marcel Lefebvre always advised us and reprimanded us, waiting that the Society reanimates anew in the Faith, which is what I hope, because it has the means to do it, it has excellent bishops and priests.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Concerning the accusation that I mislead the faithful, giving the false impression that I invited Msgr Williamson with all permissions of Msgr Fellay, I can say that for a long time I didn't hide our opposition against the policies of Msgr Fellay to anybody; and, even given that the brazilian people may be somewhat green, I don't think that they are as green as the Rev Fr Bouchacourt thinks. On the contrary. Who doesn't know that Msgr Williamson is unpopular in Menzingen? However, here he is popular, because obedience is a virtue only if it submits to higher virtues, above all faith, hope and charity. To misuse obedience as a weapon to paralyse Tradition and repeat the master-stroke of Satan, like Msgr Lefebvre said, who by obedience put the whole Church into disobedience against tradition. We won't do that.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Let them say whatever they'll say. There is a problem, and this problem is of faith and it is grave. [cf. <a href="http://gloria.tv/?media=319542" target="_blank">Arsenius</a>, Faber]. Our position is already taken. We support who defends the faith as Msgr Lefebvre, Dom Antônio de Castro Mayer, St. Pius X and the whole Tradition of the Church did. If we have to suffer because of this, we will suffer, for Our Lord has warned us: “Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted” (2 Tim. 3, 12).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Concerning the Society, we consider it to be a providencial work, founded by a Bishop who took the most difficult virtues to the highest heroism, which are those for which God created the gifts of wisdom, intelligence, counsel, strength, science, piety and fear of God. Msgr Lefebvre, we consider him as a light that shone in the darkness of the modern world, and the Society is his work and his heiress, but with the condition to be true to the received grace. We pray for her and if we oppose the policies of Msgr Fellay, it's not because we wish to be hostile against the Society, but for love of her and of Msgr Fellay himself, like we love the Holy Church and for love of her we fight the liberalism and modernism of her enemies, who installed themselves within her. May God bless and save the Society of St. Pius X, to whom I owe all I received of the best, as much the faith as the priesthood, which I received from the hands of H.E. Msgr Marcel Lefebvre.</div>
<div>Br. Tomás de Aquino</div>
<div>8th of September 2012</div>
<div>Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Taken from <a href="http://www.spessantotomas.blogspot.com.br/">http://www.spessantotomas.blogspot.com.br/</a></div>
</div>
</div> Fraternidad Sacerdotal San Pí…tag:op54rosary.ning.com,2012-09-10:5691517:Comment:839392012-09-10T18:08:15.391ZDawn Mariehttps://op54rosary.ning.com/profile/DawnMarie
<div style="border: groove 10px black; background-color: cornsilk; padding: 12px;"><p><span style="color: #990000;">Fraternidad Sacerdotal San Pío X</span></p>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">Distrito América del Sur</span></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">El Superior</span></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">+Martínez [Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina], September 6, 2012</span> <br></br></blockquote>
<p> …</p>
</div>
<div style="border: groove 10px black; background-color: cornsilk; padding: 12px;"><p><span style="color: #990000;">Fraternidad Sacerdotal San Pío X</span></p>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">Distrito América del Sur</span></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">El Superior</span></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">+Martínez [Province of Buenos Aires, Argentina], September 6, 2012</span> <br/></blockquote>
<p> </p>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">At the invitation of Dom Tomás de Aquino, prior of the monastery of the Holy Cross of Nova Friburgo [state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil], Bishop Williamson came to confer the sacrament of confirmation and give some lectures.</span><br/> <span style="color: #990000;"><br/></span> <span style="color: #990000;">I would like to clarify that this trip was organized independently of the SSPX. Indeed, according to the directives left by our founder Archbishop Lefebvre, only the Superior General, Bishop Fellay in this case, issues mandates to the auxiliary bishops to undertake a pastoral visit. This procedure has not been respected, which is a serious act against the virtue of obedience, but also an attack upon the most elementary demands of courtesy. In addition, the District Superior's agreement was not requested as required by the statutes of our Fraternity. The harmonious collaboration that existed between the SSPX and the Monastery of the Holy Cross has been broken by this act of great gravity, so the organizers must take responsibility before God. Indeed, many faithful were deceived and attended the announced ceremonies and conferences believing that they had been organized by the SSPX.</span><br/> <span style="color: #990000;"><br/></span> <span style="color: #990000;">After reading the article of Dom Tomás de Aquino, "Honor and Glory to Bp. Williamson", I firmly denounce the indirect accusations which were made suggesting that the SSPX would agree with Modernism and cease fighting in defense of Catholic Tradition .</span><br/> <span style="color: #990000;"><br/></span> <span style="color: #990000;">Such insinuations are gratuitous, false, hurtful and injurious to our Superior General and to the members of the SSPX. I cannot remain silent. If Bishop Fellay rejected the outstretched hand of Rome on June 13, it was for doctrinal reasons. And it is because we reject the Modernism-influenced Vatican II which is the main cause of the ruin of the Church today and we want to continue saying this, it is also because we reject the Novus Ordo Missae that departs from both Catholic doctrine "entirely and specifically", that no practical agreement has been signed with Rome. This was the position of Archbishop Lefebvre yesterday and this is the position of Monsignor Fellay today. The General Chapter last July confirmed this [position]. Any other assertion is nothing more than a manipulation or lie. Any prophecy of a future practical agreement reveals an unhealthy imagination.</span><br/> <span style="color: #990000;"><br/></span> <span style="color: #990000;">In early December, Bishop de Galarreta will come to visit and confer the sacrament of Confirmation in Brazil and other countries in our district as our Superior General planned for many months.</span><br/> <span style="color: #990000;"><br/></span> <span style="color: #990000;">I invite the faithful of Catholic tradition in Brazil not to pay attention to rumors, to continue to support their priests with their sacrifices, prayers, and generosity, and to beg God to send numerous and ardent vocations to defend and extend the reign of Christ the King under the noble banner of Catholic tradition and the protection of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary. God bless you!</span><br/></blockquote>
<p><span style="color: #990000;"> </span></p>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">Father Christian Bouchacourt</span></blockquote>
<blockquote><span style="color: #990000;">District Superior</span></blockquote>
</div>